In the last couple of days, Twitter has taken me both to Bosnia-Herzegovina and to Wales. Other than the collapsing entity, which is barely a generation old, that is currently centred on Sarajevo, there has never been a state comprised of the whole of either but of nowhere else.
Like Tibet. Like Ireland without the monarch first of England and then of Great Britain serving also as monarch of Ireland (in a Protestant supremacist order, let it not be forgotten; the Union was successfully and accurately sold to Catholics as the means to their Emancipation, in the teeth of the Orange Lodges' opposition to both). But unlike Palestine, which existed as a country on the map between 1920 and 1948. Dig out maps from that period, and take a look.
What a useful concept principality is. It accurately describes Liechtenstein's relationship with Switzerland. It accurately describes Monaco's relationship with France. It accurately describes Andorra's relationship both with France and with Spain. Although the term Princely State was preferred, it accurately described the relationship of almost, if almost, all of those to British India.
And, more and more, it accurately describes the position of Wales within the United Kingdom, which the BBC has instead to describe as "a national region", whatever one of those might be. In the wildly improbable event of Welsh independence, there can be no doubt that the entity thus constituted would at least initially be a Commonwealth Realm called the Principality of Wales.
There is apparently to be a referendum on yet further Welsh devolution, despite the persistence of profound ambivalence, with well over a third voting No to the most recent round in 2011, as good as certainly including the great majority of those, still a significant minority but obscured by the First Past The Post electoral system, who are supporters of the Prime Minister's own party. Plaid Cymru's share of the vote at the 2011 Assembly Election was only half the size of that which rejected further devolution in the same year.
An opportunity now presents itself.
The status of Wales as a principality within the United Kingdom, the Principality of Wales, ought to be confirmed in Statute, with the monarch as de jure Prince of Wales, and with the title vested honorarily, together with ceremonial duties, in the Heir to the Throne at the monarch's pleasure.
Legislation of the Welsh Assembly would come into effect with the Assent of the monarch as Prince of Wales, and primary legislation could not be submitted for Royal Assent without the prior approval of a resolution of the House of Commons if it had been referred for such approval by the Prime Minister, or by the Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, or by the Secretary of State for Wales, or by any member of the House of Commons sitting for a Welsh constituency, or by any fifth or more of the members of the Welsh Assembly, or by any third or more of those members (whether constituency, list, or both) from any of the five electoral regions, or by resolution of any local authority in Wales, or by petition of at least 50,000 registered electors in Wales.
The greater number of the strongest supporters of, in particular, that parliamentary safeguard would be a very high proportion of the Labour-voting majority. They suffer most as a result of the takeover of Wales by an upper-middle-class oligarchy which uses Welsh while living in English-speaking areas, exactly as predicted by Leo Abse in the 1970s, together with the weakening of trade union bargaining power throughout the United Kingdom, as also fully anticipated in the course of those debates.
Especially with the principality provision to put the belt and braces on Tory support, this ought to be proposed by Labour when the Bill providing for the next referendum comes before the Commons. However, it should simply be an additional part of that Bill, and not conditional on the outcome of that referendum, which is in any case to be on the question, only tangentially related, of the devolution of the power to levy income tax.
If, most regrettably, this did have to be a backbench amendment, then obviously it would be best if it came from an MP who sat for a Welsh constituency. But failing that, or perhaps within it, it would look like a very enterprising, and a very worthwhile, way of securing oneself 20 or more nominations in the next election for Leader or Deputy Leader of the Labour Party.
Leo Abse indeed, you seem to have adopted his writing style.
ReplyDeleteAnother one to add to the long list of pieces of legislation that would have come before the House if you had had your rightful place in it.
You would have been as considerable a figure as Abse, or George Cunningham in his heyday.
Even that reference to Palestine serves as a reminder that, albeit with a stick, the legitimate heir of David Watkins walks among us.
We all consider the years between 1983 and 1997 the lost Watkins generation of this seat. It should have been represented by a figure of international importance, not by the Armstrongs.
You would have been a worthy successor.
You are very kind, but I was still a teenager until nearly four months after the 1997 General Election.
ReplyDeleteThe story of my life, and especially of my political life when I had one, has been of people who could not and cannot decide whether to treat me as far older, or as far younger, than my true age.
In the end, they have never had any trouble doing both.